Hong Seon Lee1, Myeong-Jin Kim2, Chansik An1. 1. Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea. KIMNEX@yuhs.ac.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of each LR-M feature defined in version 2017 of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and determine the optimal LR-M feature for differentiating combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on gadoxetate-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with pathologically proven cHCC-CCA (n = 33) or HCC (n = 66) after surgery were identified. Two radiologists retrospectively assessed preoperative gadoxetate-enhanced MRI for features favoring non-HCC malignancies (LR-M features) according to LI-RADS version 2017. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the independent differential features. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cHCC-CCA were calculated for each LR-M feature. RESULTS: Targetoid appearance showed the highest sensitivity (75.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 60.6%, 87.3%) to correctly identify cHCC-CCA as LR-M. At least one LR-M feature was observed in 31 (93.9%) patients with cHCC-CCA and 34 (51.5%) patients with HCC. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cHCC-CCA using the presence of any one of the LR-M features were 93.9% (95% CI 80.7, 98.9) and 48.5% (95% CI 41.9, 51.0), respectively. The presence of three LR-M features yielded the highest diagnostic accuracy of 80.8% (95% CI 72.1, 86.1) with a reduced sensitivity of 54.5% (95% CI 41.4, 62.5). CONCLUSION: The majority of cHCC-CCA cases can be properly categorized as LR-M when any one of the LR-M features defined in the LI-RADS version 2017 is used as a determiner. However, approximately half of HCC cases also show at least one LR-M feature. KEY POINTS: • Targetoid appearance, including rim APHE, peripheral "washout" appearance, and delayed central enhancement, was the LR-M feature that identified cHCC-CCA as a non-HCC malignancy with the highest sensitivity. • Most cHCC-CCA cases can be properly categorized as LR-M when the presence of any one of the LR-M features was used as the determiner. • Approximately half of HCC cases also showed at least one LR-M feature.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of each LR-M feature defined in version 2017 of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and determine the optimal LR-M feature for differentiating combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on gadoxetate-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with pathologically proven cHCC-CCA (n = 33) or HCC (n = 66) after surgery were identified. Two radiologists retrospectively assessed preoperative gadoxetate-enhanced MRI for features favoring non-HCC malignancies (LR-M features) according to LI-RADS version 2017. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the independent differential features. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cHCC-CCA were calculated for each LR-M feature. RESULTS: Targetoid appearance showed the highest sensitivity (75.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 60.6%, 87.3%) to correctly identify cHCC-CCA as LR-M. At least one LR-M feature was observed in 31 (93.9%) patients with cHCC-CCA and 34 (51.5%) patients with HCC. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cHCC-CCA using the presence of any one of the LR-M features were 93.9% (95% CI 80.7, 98.9) and 48.5% (95% CI 41.9, 51.0), respectively. The presence of three LR-M features yielded the highest diagnostic accuracy of 80.8% (95% CI 72.1, 86.1) with a reduced sensitivity of 54.5% (95% CI 41.4, 62.5). CONCLUSION: The majority of cHCC-CCA cases can be properly categorized as LR-M when any one of the LR-M features defined in the LI-RADS version 2017 is used as a determiner. However, approximately half of HCC cases also show at least one LR-M feature. KEY POINTS: • Targetoid appearance, including rim APHE, peripheral "washout" appearance, and delayed central enhancement, was the LR-M feature that identified cHCC-CCA as a non-HCC malignancy with the highest sensitivity. • Most cHCC-CCA cases can be properly categorized as LR-M when the presence of any one of the LR-M features was used as the determiner. • Approximately half of HCC cases also showed at least one LR-M feature.
Authors: Sun Kyung Jeon; Ijin Joo; Dong Ho Lee; Sang Min Lee; Hyo-Jin Kang; Kyoung-Bun Lee; Jeong Min Lee Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Julie K Heimbach; Laura M Kulik; Richard S Finn; Claude B Sirlin; Michael M Abecassis; Lewis R Roberts; Andrew X Zhu; M Hassan Murad; Jorge A Marrero Journal: Hepatology Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Tyler J Fraum; Richard Tsai; Eric Rohe; Daniel R Ludwig; Amber Salter; ILKe Nalbantoglu; Jay P Heiken; Kathryn J Fowler Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Tyler J Fraum; Roberto Cannella; Daniel R Ludwig; Richard Tsai; Muhammad Naeem; Maverick LeBlanc; Amber Salter; Allan Tsung; Anup S Shetty; Amir A Borhani; Alessandro Furlan; Kathryn J Fowler Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-10-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Chansik An; Chang Hee Lee; Jae Ho Byun; Min Hee Lee; Woo Kyoung Jeong; Sang Hyun Choi; Do Young Kim; Young Suk Lim; Young Seok Kim; Ji Hoon Kim; Moon Seok Choi; Myeong Jin Kim Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 3.500